On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 02:07:09PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Mon, 10 Jul 2023 09:04:42 +0800, Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> Sorry for the late reply! I'm not sure. How can I know whether it is translatable?
Per the documentation:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/nls-programmer.html#NLS-GUIDELINES
Now, if you want to look at the shape of the messages, you could also
run something like a `make init-po` and look at the messages generated
in a .pot file.
> Honestly, I'm not sold on the idea that we need to exhaust ourselves
> providing an exhaustive list of usable keywords for users here. I
> believe that it is unlikely that these keywords will be used in
> different combinations each time without looking at the
> documentation. On top of that, consider "csvlog" as an example, -- it
> doesn't work as expected if logging_collector is off. Although this is
> documented, we don't give any warnings at startup. This seems like a
> bigger issue than the unusable keywords. (I don't mean to suggest to
> fix this, as usual.)
>
> In short, I think a simple message like '"xxx" cannot be used in this
> build' should suffice for keywords defined but unusable, and we should
> stick with "unknown" for the undefined ones.
Which is roughly what the existing GUC_check_errdetail() does as well,
but you indeed lose a bit of context because the option wanted is not
built. I am not convinced that there is something to change here.
--
Michael